Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Can great generals apologize and still be great?

My email to the Dept. of Defense:

Once again we need to remind people that no one chooses to be gay or lesbian. There is no advantage of any kind to being homosexual, and no gay man ever consciously chose to "forsake the natural use of the woman." Homosexuality occurs naturally and runs in families. So labeling as immoral the "acts" "committed" by homosexuals makes as much sense as labeling as immoral the "acts" "committed" by left-handers, those with brown eyes, or the French. A person consciously chooses to have brown eyes? Of course not. People must come to understand that being gay or lesbian arises from the same source as other physical and psychological traits.

I know that Gen. Pace means well in condemning homosexual acts. He simply wants to be a good person, a good follower of Christ and the Church. But the tens of thousands of gay men and women serving in the military also want to be good people, and Gen. Pace's comments demean them and negate their service to the country, service that is as courageous and honorable as that of non-homosexual members of the military.

Gen. Pace needs to apologize publicly for his comments regarding homosexuals. His comments were extremely inappropriate. An apology is required.

Nope, sorry. Been there, done that. I grew up in a Baptist home where Jerry Falwell was considered a little too liberal. Simply *being* a person with gay tendencies and feelings, regardless of whether or not one was celibate, was immoral because "whatsoever a man thinketh in his heart, so is he." Traditional Christianity, which dates back to the revivals of the 19th century and which Falwell-type preachers are still keeping alive today, allows for no aspect of homosexuality. The thinking that it's okay to be gay as long as one doesn't engage in homosexual acts is a recent, New Agey kind of Christianity that real Christians don't take seriously.